Sri M Puttaswamy vs Sri T R Murali
2021 Latest Caselaw 830 Kant

                          1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                      BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

     WRIT PETITION NO.144 OF 2021 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. M PUTTASWAMY,
   S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA,
   AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,

2. SMT. SAROJAMMA,
   W/O LATE SEETHARAM,
   AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

3. SRI.LOKESH,
   S/O LATE SEETHARAM,
   AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

4. SMT. VINUTHA,
   D/O LATE M MUNIRAJU,
   AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

5. SMT. SHIVALINGAMMA,
   W/O LATE M MUNIRAJU,
   AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

6. SRI. RAVI,
   S/O LATE M MUNIRAJU,
   AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

7. SRI. GANGADHAR,
   S/O LATE M MUNIRAJU,
   AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

8. SMT. LATHA,
   D/O LATE M MUNIRAJU,
   AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

  ALL ARE RESIDING AT
  NO.21, 2ND MAIN ROAD,
  DEEPANJALINAGAR,
  BENGALURU - 560 040.
                               2


NOTE: THE PETITIONERS 1,2 & 5 ARE NOT CLAIMING
THE BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN.
                                        ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. G B MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI. T R MURALI,
   S/O T S RAMASWAMY,
   IYENGAR,
   AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
   R/AT NO.99, 4TH MAIN ROAD,
   POORNAPRAGNA LAYOUT,
   BANASHANKARI III STAGE,
   BENGALURU - 560 085.

2. SMT. K SRIPRIYA,
   W/O T R MURALI,
   AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
   R/AT NO.99, 4TH MAIN ROAD,
   POORNAPRAGNA LAYOUT,
   BANASHANKARI III STAGE,
   BENGALURU - 560 085.
                                            ... RESPONDENTS

       THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.02.2020 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2
IN   O.S.NO.5169/2014    ON   THE   FIEL    FO   THE   XXXIX
ADDITIONAL     CITY   CIVIL   AND   SESSIONS     JUDGE   AT
BENGALURU CITY (CCH-40) VIDE ANNEXURE-E BY SETTING
ASIDE THE SAME AND DISMISS THE I.A.NO.2 FILED BY THE
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS AS THE SAME IS ILLEGAL AND
VOID AB INITIO.

       THIS   PETITION   COMING     ON     FOR   PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
                               3



                          ORDER

Petitioners being the defendants in a suit for bare

injunction in O.S.No.5169/2014 are knocking at the doors

of Writ Court for assailing the order dated 18.02.2020 a

copy whereof is at Annexure-E whereby the application in

IA No.2 filed by the respondent - plaintiff under Order VI

Rule 17 of CPC, 1908 having been favoured by the learned

XXXIX Additional City Civil Judge (CCH-40), Bengaluru

City, leave has been accorded to amend the plaint for

introducing a prayer for declaration of title and this is done

with a cost of Rs.1,000/-; this has been done before the

recording of evidence.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and having perused the petition papers, this

Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter on a short

ground that there is a deferred remedy availing to the

petitioners for challenging the impugned order if & when

they suffer an adverse judgment & decree, as provided

under Order XLIII Rule 1-A r/w Section 105 of amended

Code .

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is

disposed off reserving liberty to the petitioners as

mentioned above.

Learned judge of the Court below is requested to

accomplish the trial & disposal of the suit within an outer

limit of one year, all contentions of the parties having been

kept open.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Bsv